Open Access
Research (Published online: 28-07-2017)
20. Probiotic characterization of lactic acid bacteria isolated from swine intestine
K. Balasingham, C. Valli, L. Radhakrishnan and D. Balasuramanyam
Veterinary World, 10(7): 825-829

K. Balasingham: Postgraduate Research Institute of Animal Sciences, Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
C. Valli: Institute of Animal Nutrition, Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
L. Radhakrishnan: Central Feed Technology Unit, Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
D. Balasuramanyam: Postgraduate Research Institute of Animal Sciences, Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.

doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2017.825-829

Share this article on [Facebook] [LinkedIn]

Article history: Received: 03-01-2017, Accepted: 29-05-2017, Published online: 28-07-2017

Corresponding author: C. Valli


Citation: Balasingham K, Valli C, Radhakrishnan L, Balasuramanyam D (2017) Probiotic characterization of lactic acid bacteria isolated from swine intestine, Veterinary World, 10(7): 825-829.

Aim: A study was conducted with the objective to isolate probiotic microorganisms from swine intestine.

Materials and Methods: In this study 63 isolates (24 caeca, 24 colon mucosal scrapings, and 15 rectal swab samples) were collected from Large White Yorkshire pigs. The isolates were inoculated and grown in de Man Rogosa Sharpe broth at 37°C with 5% CO2 for 48 h and subjected to morphological identification. Colonies having Gram-positive rods were selected for further physiological and biochemical identification tests, which were conducted in triplicate in two runs for each of the selected isolates using a standard protocol. Probiotic properties among the identified species were determined through the implementation of several tests related with pH tolerance, bile tolerance, and antimicrobial activity.

Results: Morphological identification revealed that only 23 isolates were Gram-positive rods. Physiological tests performed on these 23 isolates further revealed that four of them did not exhibit any growth, at all conditions studied. The rest 19 isolates were, therefore, selected and subjected to biochemical tests. Six isolates were rejected because they were oxidase and nitrate reduction positive. From the 13 isolates subjected to sugar fermentation tests, speciation of only two isolates could be ascertained, one of the isolates showed characteristics for Lactobacillus acidophilus and the other for Lactobacillus plantarum. These two isolates were assessed for the strain possessing maximum probiotic property, and it was inferred that both - L. plantarum and L. acidophilus could tolerate a wide pH range (2-9), a wide bile concentration (0.05-0.3%) and revealed antimicrobial activity toward Escherichia coli, and Enterobacter spp.

Conclusion: L. plantarum and L. acidophilus were isolated from swine intestine and were found to have good probiotic properties.

Keywords: Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus plantarum, probiotic, swine intestine.


1. Thacker, P.A. (2013) Alternatives to antibiotics as growth promoters for use in swine production: A review. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol., 4: 35. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]

2. Vondruskova, H., Slamova, R., Trckova, M., Zraly, Z. and Pavli, I. (2010) Alternatives to antibiotic growth promotors in prevention of diarrhea in weaned piglets: A review. Vet. Med., 55: 199-224.

3. Van der Fels-Klerx, H.J., Puister-Jansen, L.F., van Asselt, E.D. and Burgers, S.L. (2011) Farm factors associated with the use of antibiotics in pig production. J. Anim. Sci., 89, 1922-1929. [Crossref] [PubMed]

4. Idoui, T. (2014) Probiotic properties of Lactobacillus strains isolated from gizzard of local poultry. Iran. J. Microbiol., 6(2): 120-126. [PubMed] [PMC]

5. Wang, S.D., Yang, L., Tang, X.S., Cai, L.C., Liu, G., Kong, X.F., Blachier, F. and Yin, Y.L. (2011) Dietary supplementation with high dose Bacillus subtilis or Lactobacillus returi modulates cellular and humoral immunities and improve performance in weaned piglets. J. Food Agric. Environ., 9: 181-187.

6. Hou, C., Zeng, X., Yang, F., Liu, H. and Qiao, S. (2015) Study and use of the probiotic Lactobacillus reuteri in pigs: A review. J Anim. Sci. Biotechnol., 6(1): 14. [Crossref]

7. Jorgensen, J.N. and Hansen, C.H. (2006) Probiotics for pigs-reliable solutions. Int. Pig Top., 21(7): 7-9.

8. Yeo, S., Lee, S., Park, H., Shin, H., Holzapfel, W. and Huh, C.S. (2016) Development of putative probiotics as feed additives: Validation in a porcine-specific gastrointestinal tract model. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 100(23): 10043-10054. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]

9. Vlasova, A.N., Kandasamy, S., Chattha, K.S., Rajashekara, G. and Saif, L.J. (2016) Comparison of probiotic Lactobacilli and Bifidobacteria effects, immune responses and rotavirus vaccines and infection in different host species. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol., 172: 72-84. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]

10. Kandler, O. and Weiss, N. (1986) Regular, non sporing gram-positive rods. In: Sneath, P.H.A., Mair, N.S., Sharpe, M.E., Holt, J.G., editors. Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. Williams, Wilkins, Baltimore. p1208-1260.

11. Cowan, M. and Steel, M. (2003) In: Barrow, G.I. and Feltham, R.K.A., editors. Manual for the Identification of Medical Bacteria. 3rd ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. p21-45 and 75-77.

12. Lan, Y., Verstegen, M.W.A., Tamminga, S. and Williams, B.A. (2005) The role of the commensal gut microbial community in broiler chickens. World Poult. Sci. J., 61: 95-104. [Crossref]

13. Todorov, S.D., Furtado, D.N., Saad, S.M.I., Gombossy, B.D. and Franco, M. (2011) Bacteriocin production and resistance to drugs are advantageous features for Lactobacillus acidophilus La-14, a potential probiotic strain. New Microbiol., 34(4): 357-370. [PubMed]

14. Sirilun, S., Chaiyasut, C., Kantachote, D. and Luxananil, P. (2010) Characterization of non-human origin probiotic Lactobacillus plantarum with cholesterol lowering property. Afr. J. Microbiol. Res., 4(10): 994-1000.

15. IBM Corp. (2011) SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 20.0. IBM Corp, Armonk, NY.

16. Erdogrul, O. and Erbilr, F. (2006) Isolation and characterization of Lactobacillus bulgaricus and Lactobacillus casei from various foods. Turk. J. Biol., 30: 39-44.

17. Kali, A., Srirangaraj, S. and Charles, P.M. (2015) A cost effective carbohydrate fermentation test for yeast using micrititre plate. Indian J. Med. Microbiol., 33(2): 293-295. [Crossref] [PubMed]

18. Chowdhury, A., Hossain, N.M.D., Mostazir, J.N., Fakruddin, M.D. and Billah, M.M.D. (2012) Screening of Lactobacillus spp. from buffalo yoghurt for probiotic and antibacterial activity. J. Bacteriol. Parasitol., 3(8): 1-5. [Crossref]

19. Pyar, H. and Peh, K.K. (2014) Characterization and identification of Lactobacillus acidophilus using biolog rapid identification system. Int. J. Pharm. Pharm. Sci., 6(1): 975-1491.

20. Ruiz, L., Margolles, A. and Sanchez, B. (2013) Bile resistance mechanisms in Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium. Front. Microbiol. Phys. Metabol., 4(1-8) 396-398. [Crossref]

21. Klayraung, S., Viernstein, H., Sirithunyalug, J. and Okonogi, S. (2008) Probiotic properties of Lactobacilli isolated from Dhai traditional food. Sci. Pharm., 76(3): 485-503. [Crossref]

22. Patel, H.M., Pandiella, S.S., Wang, R.H. and Webb, C. (2004) Influence of malt, wheat and barley extracts on the bile tolerance of selected strains of Lactobacilli. Food Microbiol., 21: 83-89. [Crossref]

23. Khunajakr, N., Wongwicharn, A., Moonmangmee, D. and Tantipaiboonvut, S. (2008) Screening and identification of lactic acid bacteria producing antimicrobial compounds from pig grastro intestinal tracts. KMITL Sci. Technol. J., 8(1): 8-17.

24. Aween, M.M., Hassan, Z., Muhialdin, B.J., Noor, H.M. and Eljamel, Y.A. (2012) Evaluation on antibacterial activity of Lactobacillus acidophilus strains isolated from honey. Am. J. Appl. Sci., 9: 807-817. [Crossref]